# Montecristo Especial Question



## mvorbrodt (Jan 13, 2010)

How many different sizes are there in Montecristo Especial?

I see different vendors calling them differently.
Is Especial the same as Especial No. 1 (the sizes are the same).
Is Especial No. 2 just a shorter version of No. 1? Or is it totally different flavor?

And finally, which Especial would you recommend I try?

Let me also say this... I've smoked 10+ No.4's, some No.2's, and few Edmundos. NOT A SINGLE Montecristo I ever liked, EXCEPT one that was gifted to me about a year ago which I smoked and LOVED IT, and I THINK it was the Especial given the size I remember it was.

Anyways, please recommend a Monti to me. So far all but one I've had were a massive disappointment. Yet I hear them praised so much! I want to believe... :spy:


----------



## asmartbull (Aug 16, 2009)

I think the esp is a GREAT smoke, if you like the rg.
Great construction, great flavor, but you have to sip it......

I only bet 2's if I can find them with many yrs.. on them
4's are for novice cigar friends that want to try a cuban


----------



## mvorbrodt (Jan 13, 2010)

asmartbull said:


> I think the esp is a GREAT smoke, if you like the rg.
> Great construction, great flavor, but you have to sip it......
> 
> I only bet 2's if I can find them with many yrs.. on them
> 4's are for novice cigar friends that want to try a cuban


You have got to be kidding me~!
This explains a lot :frusty:
No.2's and No.4's were so plain vanilla it was sad.

What about Edmundos?

Which Especial to get? Are they the same taste profile just different size?


----------



## asmartbull (Aug 16, 2009)

I prefer the Esp #2 ,,,It's a good size for me.


----------



## asmartbull (Aug 16, 2009)

*What about Edmundos?*

Not my cup of tea. I don't like the RG


----------



## Tarks (Mar 3, 2009)

Yes, the Especial is the same as the Especial 1. It's the lancero in the Monte line and IMO the king pin of all Monte's.

The 1's and 2's are different. Read up on some of the reviews. That will give you a better idea than me explaining what I get off these. 

Generally, I am not a big Monte fan but absolutely love the Especial's. Pull the trigger!


----------



## Tarks (Mar 3, 2009)

I'll add, the 2 best Monte's IMO are the Especials and the Sublimes.


----------



## TonyBrooklyn (Jan 28, 2010)

mvorbrodt said:


> You have got to be kidding me~!
> This explains a lot :frusty:
> No.2's and No.4's were so plain vanilla it was sad.
> 
> ...


Don't care for the Edmoundo's but the Pettite Edmundo's are great. As far as MOnties the #2 is the best Montie / Cigar there is. You guys gotta stop buying and smoking them. From that place that has new stock. 3 years minimum then we will sit and talk!:beerchug:


----------



## aea6574 (Jun 5, 2009)

I really enjoyed the Especial 2 that I had, much more then the other Montes I have had being the regular 2 and the 5. The Especial 1 will be the next box I am looking at, something about the lancero size is wonderful. 

They do need to be sipped as mentioned.

Best regards, tony


----------



## dvickery (Jan 1, 2000)

have smoked 4 or 5 boxes of especial and a single box of 25 especial#2...i love them both. i find the especial a bit (but not much)milder than the especial#2 and a bit less flavourful than the #2 also.

this being said i prefer the especial .

derrek


----------



## louistogie (Jun 21, 2007)

I've been wondering about this as well. Good thread.


----------



## Frinkiac7 (Dec 12, 2008)

The Especiales 1 & 2 are just the Monte sizes of the factory vitolas Laguito No. 1 & 2...think Cohiba Lancero & Corona Especial. I believe only Cohiba and Montecristo still have these sizes, unless you count Vegueros which no one ever talks about and have been mostly discontinued anyway.


----------



## mvorbrodt (Jan 13, 2010)

*OK, so the $64,000 questions is: are they good ROTT?*

Also, what is Montecristo Tubos? Basically a longer No. 4?

What are the other blends in the Montecristo line?

Is Montecristo A worth the money?


----------



## asmartbull (Aug 16, 2009)

mvorbrodt said:


> *OK, so the $64,000 questions is: are they good ROTT?*
> 
> Also, what is Montecristo Tubos? Basically a longer No. 4?
> 
> ...


The only A I had, had a very tight draw, so I am hesitant to spend the $$$$$.

If you are thinking of the Esp young, I would pass. I have 08's that coming into their own....but they were not great young.

In fact, I really don't think there is a monte that is good young.....


----------



## Tarks (Mar 3, 2009)

mvorbrodt said:


> *OK, so the $64,000 questions is: are they good ROTT?*
> 
> Also, what is Montecristo Tubos? Basically a longer No. 4?
> 
> ...


NO. The Monte A's are not worth the money. In fact, IMO, they aren't even worth a 1/4 of the $ they are asking. Mild and flavorless is how I see them. I find that most cigars of this size including DC's just don't do it for me.

Are they good ROTT? Sorry, no idea. I haven't smoked them ROTT. I am currently smoking boxes of Especials from 07 and they are really good but still could use a few more years.

Montecristo Tubos? Basically a longer No. 4? NO, different cigar. Different blend.


----------



## TonyBrooklyn (Jan 28, 2010)

mvorbrodt said:


> *OK, so the $64,000 questions is: are they good ROTT?*
> 
> Also, what is Montecristo Tubos? Basically a longer No. 4?
> 
> ...


I have had a few A's that where really good the #1 reminds me of them a lot. I call them the mini A's but neither is any good with less than 2-3 years like the #2 cant smoke em young. The #3, 4, 5 i have enjoyed young with less than a year on them the are very pleasing IMHO!:cowboyic9:


----------



## bpegler (Mar 30, 2006)

There was a time when sipping elegant cigars was en Vogue. Now we mostly puff away on these huge monster sticks. The Especials are gentle cigars that need time like the rest of the range. Not good ROTT but no Montecristos are.
Except the sublimes.
If you want to know what a Monte tastes like but aren't patient get the Sublimes EL 08. Not an elegant cigar but a beauty nonetheless. 
My current favorite.


----------



## TonyBrooklyn (Jan 28, 2010)

bpegler said:


> There was a time when sipping elegant cigars was en Vogue. Now we mostly puff away on these huge monster sticks. The Especials are gentle cigars that need time like the rest of the range. Not good ROTT but no Montecristos are.
> Except the sublimes.
> If you want to know what a Monte tastes like but aren't patient get the Sublimes EL 08. Not an elegant cigar but a beauty nonetheless.
> My current favorite.


In what Bob just wrote lies the beauty of what we do. One mans meat is another's poison i hate the Sublimes he loves them. The lesson here no need to ever ask for suggestions. Go out try them all decide for yourself. In the end what you say/think is all that really matters.hoto:


----------



## Tarks (Mar 3, 2009)

bpegler said:


> There was a time when sipping elegant cigars was en Vogue. Now we mostly puff away on these huge monster sticks. The Especials are gentle cigars that need time like the rest of the range. Not good ROTT but no Montecristos are.
> Except the sublimes.
> If you want to know what a Monte tastes like but aren't patient get the Sublimes EL 08. Not an elegant cigar but a beauty nonetheless.
> My current favorite.


I guess it depends on what the definition of ROTT is. The Sublimes are a 2008 release and therefor can't be purchased ROTT anymore. All have at least 2 years on them. For me, ROTT are cigars with less than a year on them.


----------



## Tarks (Mar 3, 2009)

TonyBrooklyn said:


> I have had a few A's that where really good the #1 reminds me of them a lot. I call them the mini A's but neither is any good with less than 2-3 years like the #2 cant smoke em young. The #3, 4, 5 i have enjoyed young with less than a year on them the are very pleasing IMHO!:cowboyic9:


I find that the larger RG cigars (generally speaking) get worse with age. I always find the DC's (with the exception of the SLR DC) to be very mild and age doesn't make them better. I smoked a 2003 Monte A a few weeks ago and it did nothing for me. Way to mild in flavor and body. Again, my palate talking here and I understand that we all have different opinions. That's the beauty of this hobby!


----------



## Frinkiac7 (Dec 12, 2008)

Tarks said:


> I find that the larger RG cigars (generally speaking) get worse with age. I always find the DC's (with the exception of the SLR DC) to be very mild and age doesn't make them better. I smoked a 2003 Monte A a few weeks ago and it did nothing for me. Way to mild in flavor and body. Again, my palate talking here and I understand that we all have different opinions. That's the beauty of this hobby!


Interesting because it seems the general consensus is that fatter-rg cigars need more age because there's just more tobacco.

Veering back into Monte territory, I will speak up for the No. 1 here as an overlooked size (well, that and the No. 3, but with the 4 and 5, I just don't see the huge appeal of the 3). Part of it is that the Cervantes/Lonsdale is just a great size...but I'll agree that the No. 1 needs plenty of age, which makes it tough to buy & enjoy and is thus often overlooked. When I have the money/patience I'm going to buy some to lay down for 3+ years and hope that I'm rewarded. But anyone buying them and smoking them young would almost certainly be unimpressed.


----------



## Tarks (Mar 3, 2009)

Frinkiac7 said:


> Interesting because it seems the general consensus is that fatter-rg cigars need more age because there's just more tobacco.
> 
> Veering back into Monte territory, I will speak up for the No. 1 here as an overlooked size (well, that and the No. 3, but with the 4 and 5, I just don't see the huge appeal of the 3). Part of it is that the Cervantes/Lonsdale is just a great size...but I'll agree that the No. 1 needs plenty of age, which makes it tough to buy & enjoy and is thus often overlooked. When I have the money/patience I'm going to buy some to lay down for 3+ years and hope that I'm rewarded. But anyone buying them and smoking them young would almost certainly be unimpressed.


I disagree with the consensus that larger RG cigars require more age. To be honest, I haven't heard many people discuss this in the cc world. Perhaps that's the case with nc's? Not sure, I don't smoke many of them to form an opinion. Here is how I see it.

Smaller RG cc's (lonsdales, PCs, coronas, lanceros etc) tend to be stronger in flavor and body. That's why I love them! The purpose of aging cc's is allow the tobaccos to marry, creating a smoother, more complex cigar. The cigar is more complex because there isn't one dominating flavor note that overpowers the pallet. Having said that, there are instances where age may make a cigar stronger, to a certain extent. I have not experienced this but have heard experiences from more senior botl's.

When a cigar starts off mild in flavor and body ROTT (like most DC's, Partagas, Hoyo, Punch, VR's) age does not make the cigar better. Again, this my personal opinion. I will add that I consider age to be +5 years. Anything less is rest.


----------



## Frinkiac7 (Dec 12, 2008)

I've never had either, but are Party Lusitanias or RA Gigantes really "mild in flavor and body?" That seems to run contrary to their "legend," but as I haven't tried either I can't speak to it.


----------



## Tarks (Mar 3, 2009)

Frinkiac7 said:


> I've never had either, but are Party Lusitanias or RA Gigantes really "mild in flavor and body?" That seems to run contrary to their "legend," but as I haven't tried either I can't speak to it.


I speaking from my opinions and experiences. Yes, I find them both to be very mild. Again, my opinion. You understand that I am talking about my opinions right? What I find mild you may find strong. I get that.  Also, I made no mention of the RA Gigantes as I have never had the pleasure of smoking.


----------



## TonyBrooklyn (Jan 28, 2010)

I personally have only experienced one Cuban Cigar that actually got stronger with age. The H Uppman Connoisseur #1. I like Tarks find that Double Corona's and Churchill sized cigars are mild to bland with too much age on them. I really only enjoy the last third of these sized cigars to begin with.:sing::cowboyic9::nod:


----------



## Tarks (Mar 3, 2009)

It's funny Tony. I was just thinking about the Churchills. I find Churchills to be blended much stronger than the DC's. I guess that's why my humi's have no DC's and several Churchills! I got a box of RA Estupendos on the way! I love these Churchills.


----------



## TonyBrooklyn (Jan 28, 2010)

In the end Jeff it all comes down to the bottom line taste is subjective.
"SMOKE WHAT YOU LIKE LIKE WHAT YOU SMOKE":nod:
Sorry didn't mean to yell Lol


----------



## Tarks (Mar 3, 2009)

TonyBrooklyn said:


> In the end Jeff it all comes down to the bottom line taste is subjective.
> "SMOKE WHAT YOU LIKE LIKE WHAT YOU SMOKE":nod:


You got that right! Our taste buds are a wonderful thing!  But, I love talking about cigars and listening to everyone's opinions on what they get from certain cigars. If we didn't have opinions, there would be no cigar forums!


----------



## Frinkiac7 (Dec 12, 2008)

I agree that taste is subjective, but the overall strength of cigars has to have at least some objective mild-strong differences based on the blend, strength of leaves included, etc. Like, a Fonseca might taste differently to different folks, but it's still going to be "mild" compared to, say, a RyJ Cazadores, simply because of how it's blended. That's what I mean when I'm talking about reputation for being stronger...


----------



## Tarks (Mar 3, 2009)

Frinkiac7 said:


> I agree that taste is subjective, but the overall strength of cigars has to have at least some objective mild-strong differences based on the blend, strength of leaves included, etc. Like, a Fonseca might taste differently to different folks, but it's still going to be "mild" compared to, say, a RyJ Cazadores, simply because of how it's blended. That's what I mean when I'm talking about reputation for being stronger...


Are you referring to the nicotine strength of a cigar? If so, I see your point. I am speaking of the strength in flavor not nicotine.


----------



## TonyBrooklyn (Jan 28, 2010)

I agree there are Full bodied marca's Cohiba Partagas Bolivar Monticristo Vegas Robaina come to mind. There are light bodied marca's as well Saint Luis Rey, El Rey Del Mundo, Sancho Pansa Fonsecka, La Gloria Cubana come to mind. There are a bit more that sit on the fence sort of mild to meduim bodied as well. Like San Cristobal, And still those that sit on the fence of medium to full like Romeo y Julieta. Still those that sit on a fence of mild to medium medium to full at any given time depending on Vitola example. Punch double corona mild to medium Punch -Punch medium to full depending who was rolling that day.:cowboyic9::nod::fish:


----------



## Cadillac (Feb 28, 2007)

bpegler said:


> There was a time when sipping elegant cigars was en Vogue. Now we mostly puff away on these huge monster sticks. The Especials are gentle cigars that need time like the rest of the range. Not good ROTT but no Montecristos are.
> Except the sublimes.
> If you want to know what a Monte tastes like but aren't patient get the Sublimes EL 08. Not an elegant cigar but a beauty nonetheless.
> My current favorite.


I guess taste can be subjective. I find the Sublimes taste nothing like the regular Monte line.


----------



## mvorbrodt (Jan 13, 2010)

I got some Montecristo Tubos the other day. Long and thin. Are they good ROTT ???


----------



## audio1der (Mar 8, 2006)

asmartbull said:


> I think the esp is a GREAT smoke, if you like the rg.
> Great construction, great flavor, but you have to sip it......
> 
> I only bet 2's if I can find them with many yrs.. on them
> 4's are for novice cigar friends that want to try a cuban


I'm sorry, but I take offense to such a broad statement.
#2s and #4s are not meant for any specific demographic, and certainly not for "novice cigar friends". Just because you may not care for them does not mean they should be relegated to such a place. This is ludicrous banter put forward by someone looking to try and establish themselves as superior.
:nono:


----------



## TonyBrooklyn (Jan 28, 2010)

Cadillac said:


> I guess taste can be subjective. I find the Sublimes taste nothing like the regular Monte line.


I must agree as such i really don't care for them. In much the same way i never cared for the Cohiba Sublimes. In both marca's i was looking for great renditions of the respective lines nuances. It was quite frankly disappointing in both instances. But that goes back to the old saying one mans meat is another s poison. Smoke what you like like what you smoke.:car:


----------



## TonyBrooklyn (Jan 28, 2010)

audio1der said:


> I'm sorry, but I take offense to such a broad statement.
> #2s and #4s are not meant for any specific demographic, and certainly not for "novice cigar friends". Just because you may not care for them does not mean they should be relegated to such a place. This is ludicrous banter put forward by someone looking to try and establish themselves as superior.
> :nono:


I don't think Bull Man meant any offense Kevin. He was just expressing his personal opinion. I know him as many on here do. He is a great BOTL never puts himself above anyone. I think you got his response all wrong.:bolt:


----------



## asmartbull (Aug 16, 2009)

audio1der said:


> I'm sorry, but I take offense to such a broad statement.
> #2s and #4s are not meant for any specific demographic, and certainly not for "novice cigar friends". Just because you may not care for them does not mean they should be relegated to such a place. This is ludicrous banter put forward by someone looking to try and establish themselves as superior.
> :nono:


I should have been more clear. I enjoy the 4's and have gone thru many boxes. When one of my friends who have never had a Cuban cigar, wants to try a "cuban", I give them a #4 first....since it is the best selling cc on the market.....hence "novice cigar friends...if that offends you,
oh well:ask:


----------



## audio1der (Mar 8, 2006)

Fair enough; my apologies.
:grouphug:


----------



## Scardinoz (Mar 15, 2010)

mvorbrodt said:


> I got some Montecristo Tubos the other day. Long and thin. Are they good ROTT ???


In my opinion these are good ROTT.


----------



## Tarks (Mar 3, 2009)

audio1der said:


> Fair enough; my apologies.
> :grouphug:


Ahhhhh, group hug!!!! 

What's going on Kevin? Long time no hear...you coming to Havana in Feb with Scottie, Sat and myself? LMAO, threadjack happening now!!!! :evil:


----------

